Dataset Information

What are the risk factors of hospital length of stay in the novel coronavirus pneumonia (COVID-19) patients? A survival analysis in southwest China.

ABSTRACT:

Background

The global epidemic of novel coronavirus pneumonia (COVID-19) has resulted in substantial healthcare resource consumption. Since patients' hospital length of stay (LoS) is at stake in the process, an investigation of COVID-19 patients' LoS and its risk factors becomes urgent for a better understanding of regional capabilities to cope with COVID-19 outbreaks.

Methods

First, we obtained retrospective data of confirmed COVID-19 patients in Sichuan province via National Notifiable Diseases Reporting System (NNDRS) and field surveys, including their demographic, epidemiological, clinical characteristics and LoS. Then we estimated the relationship between LoS and the possibly determinant factors, including demographic characteristics of confirmed patients, individual treatment behavior, local medical resources and hospital grade. The Kaplan-Meier method and the Cox Proportional Hazards Model were applied for single factor and multi-factor survival analysis.

Results

From January 16, 2020 to March 4, 2020, 538 human cases of COVID-19 infection were laboratory-confirmed, and were hospitalized for treatment, including 271 (50%) patients aged ≥ 45, 285 (53%) males, and 450 patients (84%) with mild symptoms. The median LoS was 19 (interquartile range (IQR): 14-23, range: 3-41) days. Univariate analysis showed that age and clinical grade were strongly related to LoS (P<0.01). Adjusted multivariate analysis showed that the longer LoS was associated with those aged ≥ 45 (Hazard ratio (HR): 0.74, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.60-0.91), admission to provincial hospital (HR: 0.73, 95% CI: 0.54-0.99), and severe illness (HR: 0.66, 95% CI: 0.48-0.90). By contrast, the shorter LoS was linked with residential areas with more than 5.5 healthcare workers per 1,000 population (HR: 1.32, 95% CI: 1.05-1.65). Neither gender factor nor time interval from illness onset to diagnosis showed significant impact on LoS.

Conclusions

Understanding COVID-19 patients' hospital LoS and its risk factors is critical for governments' efficient allocation of resources in respective regions. In areas with older and more vulnerable population and in want of primary medical resources, early reserving and strengthening of the construction of multi-level medical institutions are strongly suggested to cope with COVID-19 outbreaks.

SUBMITTER: Wang Z

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8759704 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:ImportanceRandomized clinical trials have yielded conflicting results about the effects of remdesivir therapy on survival and length of hospital stay among people with COVID-19.ObjectiveTo examine associations between remdesivir treatment and survival and length of hospital stay among people hospitalized with COVID-19 in routine care settings.Design, setting, and participantsThis retrospective cohort study used data from the Veterans Health Administration (VHA) to identify adult patients in 123 VHA hospitals who had a first hospitalization with laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 from May 1 to October 8, 2020. Propensity score matching of patients initiating remdesivir treatment to control patients who had not initiated remdesivir treatment by the same hospital day was used to create the analytic cohort.ExposuresRemdesivir treatment.Main outcomes and measuresTime to death within 30 days of remdesivir treatment initiation (or corresponding hospital day for matched control individuals) and time to hospital discharge with time to death as a competing event. Associations between remdesivir treatment and these outcomes were assessed using Cox proportional hazards regression in the matched cohort.ResultsThe initial cohort included 5898 patients admitted to 123 hospitals, 2374 (40.3%) of whom received remdesivir treatment (2238 men [94.3%]; mean [SD] age, 67.8 [12.8] years) and 3524 (59.7%) of whom never received remdesivir treatment (3302 men [93.7%]; mean [SD] age, 67.0 [14.4] years). After propensity score matching, the analysis included 1172 remdesivir recipients and 1172 controls, for a final matched cohort of 2344 individuals. Remdesivir recipients and matched controls were similar with regard to age (mean [SD], 66.6 [14.2] years vs 67.5 [14.1] years), sex (1101 men [93.9%] vs 1101 men [93.9%]), dexamethasone use (559 [47.7%] vs 559 [47.7%]), admission to the intensive care unit (242 [20.7%] vs 234 [19.1%]), and mechanical ventilation use (69 [5.9%] vs 45 [3.8%]). Standardized differences were less than 10% for all measures. Remdesivir treatment was not associated with 30-day mortality (143 remdesivir recipients [12.2%] vs 124 controls [10.6%]; log rank P = .26; adjusted hazard ratio [HR], 1.06; 95% CI, 0.83-1.36). Results were similar for people receiving vs not receiving dexamethasone at remdesivir initiation (dexamethasone recipients: adjusted HR, 0.93; 95% CI, 0.64-1.35; nonrecipients: adjusted HR, 1.19; 95% CI, 0.84-1.69). Remdesivir recipients had a longer median time to hospital discharge compared with matched controls (6 days [interquartile range, 4-12 days] vs 3 days [interquartile range, 1-7 days]; P < .001).Conclusions and relevanceIn this cohort study of US veterans hospitalized with COVID-19, remdesivir treatment was not associated with improved survival but was associated with longer hospital stays. Routine use of remdesivir may be associated with increased use of hospital beds while not being associated with improvements in survival.

Project description:STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. BACKGROUND: Several studies focus on the long-term results of anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) surgeries, but little information exists regarding how various patient-related, procedure-related, and payer-related variables may affect postoperative hospital length of stay (LOS). OBJECTIVE: To determine what factors, if any, contribute to increased hospital LOS in patients who have had an ACDF. METHODS: Retrospective cohort study of 108 consecutive patients who underwent elective ACDF at a Midwest academic medical center. Extensive preoperative, intraoperative, and postoperative data were abstracted and analyzed to identify prognostic factors for an increased LOS. Multivariate analysis was performed to analyze the effects of patient and hospital characteristics on hospital LOS. RESULTS: 103 patients met inclusion and exclusion criteria. The mean LOS for patients undergoing ACDF was 1.98 (±1.6) days. Only 29% of patients had one level fused. The mean blood loss during surgery was 87.4 ± 99.6 mL. One subject lost 700 mL of blood. Complications, though rare, included uncontrolled postoperative pain (13%), cardiac (6%), pulmonary (4%), and urinary (3%). Covariates included in the final model were age, sex, cardiac complication, urinary complication, and pulmonary complication. Factors that contributed to increased LOS and their associated adjusted mean days were: ≥50 years of age (2.5 ± 1.2 days), female gender (2.3 ± 1.2 days), and three particular types of complications. The complications that had the largest effect on increased LOS from least to most severe were cardiac (3.5 ± 1.3 days), urinary (4.7 ± 1.3 days), and pulmonary (5.3 ± 1.3 days). CONCLUSIONS: The information presented in this study may be useful for patients, clinicians, and insurance companies, including precertification and case-management services. Our results can be instrumental in designing future prospective studies using more detailed analyses with more patients, more surgeons, and multiple institutions. [Table: see text].

Project description:BackgroundThe COVID-19 pandemic has placed an unprecedented strain on health systems, with rapidly increasing demand for healthcare in hospitals and intensive care units (ICUs) worldwide. As the pandemic escalates, determining the resulting needs for healthcare resources (beds, staff, equipment) has become a key priority for many countries. Projecting future demand requires estimates of how long patients with COVID-19 need different levels of hospital care.MethodsWe performed a systematic review of early evidence on length of stay (LoS) of patients with COVID-19 in hospital and in ICU. We subsequently developed a method to generate LoS distributions which combines summary statistics reported in multiple studies, accounting for differences in sample sizes. Applying this approach, we provide distributions for total hospital and ICU LoS from studies in China and elsewhere, for use by the community.ResultsWe identified 52 studies, the majority from China (46/52). Median hospital LoS ranged from 4 to 53 days within China, and 4 to 21 days outside of China, across 45 studies. ICU LoS was reported by eight studies-four each within and outside China-with median values ranging from 6 to 12 and 4 to 19 days, respectively. Our summary distributions have a median hospital LoS of 14 (IQR 10-19) days for China, compared with 5 (IQR 3-9) days outside of China. For ICU, the summary distributions are more similar (median (IQR) of 8 (5-13) days for China and 7 (4-11) days outside of China). There was a visible difference by discharge status, with patients who were discharged alive having longer LoS than those who died during their admission, but no trend associated with study date.ConclusionPatients with COVID-19 in China appeared to remain in hospital for longer than elsewhere. This may be explained by differences in criteria for admission and discharge between countries, and different timing within the pandemic. In the absence of local data, the combined summary LoS distributions provided here can be used to model bed demands for contingency planning and then updated, with the novel method presented here, as more studies with aggregated statistics emerge outside China.

Project description:BackgroundRadical prostatectomy (RP) is a leading treatment option for localised prostate cancer. Although hospital in-patient stays accounts for much of the costs of treatment, little is known about population-level trends in length-of-stay (LOS). We investigated factors predicting hospital LOS and readmissions in men who had RP following prostate cancer.MethodsIncident prostate cancers (ICD-O3: C61), diagnosed January 2002-December 2008 in men < 70 years, were identified from the Irish Cancer Registry, and linked to public hospital episodes. For those who had RP (ICD-9 CM procedure codes 60.3, 60.4, 60.5, 60.62) the associated hospital episode was identified. LOS was calculated as the number of days from date of admission to date of discharge. Patient-, tumour-, and health service-related factors predicting longer LOS (upper quartile, >9 days) were investigated using logistic regression. Patterns in day-case and in-patient readmissions within 28 days of discharge following RP were explored.ResultsOver the study period 9096 prostate cancers were diagnosed in men under 70, 26.5% of whom had RP by end of follow-up 31/12/2009. Two of eight public hospitals and eight of forty surgeons carried out 50% of all public-service RPs. Median LOS was 8 days (10th-90th percentile = 6-13 days) and fell significantly over time (2002, 9 days; 2008, 7 days; p < 0.001). In adjusted analyses men who were not married (OR = 1.71, 95% CI 1.25-2.34), had co-morbidities (OR = 1.64, 95% CI 1.25-2.16) or stage III-IV cancer (OR = 2.19, 95% CI 1.44-3.34) were significantly more likely to have prolonged LOS. Those treated in higher volume hospitals (annual median >49 RPs) or by higher volume surgeons (annual median >17 RPs) were significantly less likely to have prolonged LOS (OR = 0.34, 95% CI 0.26-0.45; OR = 0.55, 95% CI 0.42-0.71 respectively).ConclusionMedian LOS after RP decreased between 2002 and 2008 in Ireland but it remains higher than in both England and the US. Although volumes of RPs conducted in Ireland are low, there is considerable variation between hospitals and surgeons. Hospital and surgeon volume were strong predictors of shorter LOS, after adjusting for other variables. These factors point to a need for a comprehensive review of prostate cancer service provision.